1 2 O

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 ANGEL ALEJANDRO CARMONA, Case No. 2:25-cv-05280-SVW-KES

12 Petitioner,

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND

13 v.

RECOMMENDATION OF U.S.

14 FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15 Respondent.

16

17

18 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Report and

19 Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 10) and the other

20 records on file herein. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those

21 portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections (Dkt. 12) have

22 been made. The Court accepts the report, findings, and recommendations of the

23 Magistrate Judge.

24 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judgment be entered denying the

25 Petition with prejudice.

26 As a federal prisoner proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Petitioner is not

27 required to obtain a certificate of appealability (“COA”) in order to appeal to the

28 1 | United States Court of Appeals in this case. See Harrison v. Ollison, 519 F.3d 952, 2 | 958 (9th Cir. 2008) (holding that the plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) does 3 | not require federal prisoners bringing § 2241 petitions to obtain a COA in order to 4 | appeal, unless the § 2241 petition “is merely a ‘disguised’ § 2255 petition”); see 5 | e.g., Tomlinson v. Caraway, No. 14-cv-020094-VBF-KK, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6 | 131448 at *2, 2014 WL 4656432 at *1 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 16, 2014) (adopting report 7 || and recommendation and noting that petitioner in federal custody was not required 8 || to obtain a COA to appeal the denial of his § 2241 petition).

10 | DATED: November 19, 2025 □□ (GEOR ll STEPHEN V. WILSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28